Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Can we keep stuff like this under spoilers please?Jesus Christ.
Some of us do like waiting until we buy the comics to find out the plot.
-AC
That's going to be brutal on you. Do you want people to cover up the comic book covers as well? Seeing as the covers gives away actually more than this title's thread. I also wonder how you decide which comics to buy? The list of monthly solicits also includes greater spoilers than this.
Originally posted by Kris Blaze
That's going to be brutal on you. Do you want people to cover up the comic book covers as well? Seeing as the covers gives away actually more than this title's thread. I also wonder how you decide which comics to buy? The list of monthly solicits also includes greater spoilers than this.
It's still a valid complaint. Covers rarely reveal much. They're more to entice the reader rather than tell them exactly what happens. How many times have we seen "The Death of {insert character}" on a cover, for example, only to have no one die. Many examples like this can be found.
No, it's possible to avoid spoilers, but not when people have them in thread titles. It's not a strict forum offense, but is something we should be aware of and try to avoid.
As such, I edited the title. I realize some damage is done already, but it can hopefully serve as a reminder.
Originally posted by Digi
It's still a valid complaint. Covers rarely reveal much. They're more to entice the reader rather than tell them exactly what happens. How many times have we seen "The Death of {insert character}" on a cover, for example, only to have no one die. Many examples like this can be found.No, it's possible to avoid spoilers, but not when people have them in thread titles. It's not a strict forum offense, but is something we should be aware of and try to avoid.
As such, I edited the title. I realize some damage is done already, but it can hopefully serve as a reminder.
Digi, the cover has X-man and only x-man on it.
I can understand AC's concerns about titles revealing something that takes place INSIDE a comic, but this is the cover. There is no way he can pick up the comic without knowing that Nate Grey returns. There is no way he locate the comic without knowing Nate Grey returns. Unless someone blindfolded him, took him the comic-shop and then handed him a copy, with the cover ripped off, might it not spoil. This supposed spoiler was awfully mild compared to the solicits.
Regardless, there's already a thread for X-men, one for Dark Reign titles and a forum for the X-men. This can probably be merged with one of them.
Originally posted by Kris Blaze
Digi, the cover has X-man and only x-man on it.I can understand AC's concerns about titles revealing something that takes place INSIDE a comic, but this is the cover. There is no way he can pick up the comic without knowing that Nate Grey returns. There is no way he locate the comic without knowing Nate Grey returns. Unless someone blindfolded him, took him the comic-shop and then handed him a copy, with the cover ripped off, might it not spoil. This supposed spoiler was awfully mild compared to the solicits.
Regardless, there's already a thread for X-men, one for Dark Reign titles and a forum for the X-men. This can probably be merged with one of them.
That isn't always the case with covers, however, especially since I have seen "returned" people on covers that actually aren't. A perusal of recent Cpt. America or Batman comics is enough to tell us that. Regardless, not revealing spoilers in titles is still a good practice to adopt.
I'll consider the merge. Thanks for the suggestion.
Originally posted by Digi
That isn't always the case with covers, however, especially since I have seen "returned" people on covers that actually aren't. A perusal of recent Cpt. America or Batman comics is enough to tell us that. Regardless, not revealing spoilers in titles is still a good practice to adopt.I'll consider the merge. Thanks for the suggestion.
No problem.
I just think there's a difference between "interview/article spoilers" and "inside comics spoilers" But I guess they do intermingle sometimes.
http://www.killermovies.com/forums/f95/t514567.html
Use this. Thanks.
Originally posted by Kris Blaze
KM came like 50 times in his pants when he read Dark X-men: The beginning 3
😂
What I like best about Dark Reign, is how the Pro-Registration heroes take it on the chin worse than anyone.
They believed so much that it was time for the government to take control of the hero community, supervise them? Well...nothing's changed with Norman Osborn in charge - the same principle applies. Apparently, it doesn't count when your hand-picked Avenger teammate isn't running the world?
But - Osborn is a sociopath, even while taking medication? They couldn't work for him? Well, he wasn't bad enough for Tony not to use him against the Atlanteans, and manipulate Civil War opinion in the direction he wanted - then give him a cushy job with the Thunderbolts later. That's why I'm enjoying seeing Tony's ruin right now (for a while), Reed Richards feeling guilt, and to see Miss Marvel shown up as a hypocrite.
Originally posted by roughrider
What I like best about Dark Reign, is how the Pro-Registration heroes take it on the chin worse than anyone.
They believed so much that it was time for the government to take control of the hero community, supervise them? Well...nothing's changed with Norman Osborn in charge - the same principle applies. Apparently, it doesn't count when your hand-picked Avenger teammate isn't running the world?
But - Osborn is a sociopath, even while taking medication? They couldn't work for him? Well, he wasn't bad enough for Tony not to use him against the Atlanteans, and manipulate Civil War opinion in the direction he wanted - then give him a cushy job with the Thunderbolts later. That's why I'm enjoying seeing Tony's ruin right now (for a while), Reed Richards feeling guilt, and to see Miss Marvel shown up as a hypocrite.
Totally. I mean Civil War itself had the ultimate weakness in the anti-reg argument, the New Warrior's incident. Now we get to see the ultimate weakness in the pro-reg argument: Norman running the show, seeking Tony out, partly for a list of registered names!
This has led many to speculate that the next event
Spoiler:will involve some kind of spiritual sequel to Civil War whereby Iron-Patriot is defeated once and for all by either Bucky Cap or the newly returned Steve Rogers.
Now revealed to be entitled "Siege"
These past few events have been amazing, in hindsight. It's all locked in amazingly.
If they cap it off with Dark Reign, that'd be great.
However, if they choose to PROPERLY end it with an event centred around Asgard and/or Thor, they need to make it brilliant. They can't do it the way Thor is now.
It'd make no sense having an Asgard-centred event with Steve or Bucky being the main hero.
-AC